Joseph M. Graf v. Carolyn Badila Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County, Virginia County of Fairfax, Virginia, and Kari Graf

53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16737, 1995 WL 272563
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 10, 1995
Docket94-2160
StatusPublished

This text of 53 F.3d 328 (Joseph M. Graf v. Carolyn Badila Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County, Virginia County of Fairfax, Virginia, and Kari Graf) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Joseph M. Graf v. Carolyn Badila Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County, Virginia County of Fairfax, Virginia, and Kari Graf, 53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16737, 1995 WL 272563 (4th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

53 F.3d 328
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Joseph M. GRAF, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Carolyn BADILA; Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County,
Virginia; County of Fairfax, Virginia, Defendants-Appellees,
and
Kari Graf, Defendant.

No. 94-2160.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 20, 1995.
Decided: May 10, 1995.

Joseph M. Graf, Appellant Pro Se. Peter Donald Andreoli, Jr., Assistant County Attorney, Fairfax, VA, for Appellees.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals from the district court's orders (i) dismissing his civil Complaint charging negligence under state law and federal constitutional violations, and (ii) denying his motion to alter or amend judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and orders, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Graf v. Badila, No. CA-94-365-A (E.D. Va. May 20, July 29, and Aug. 10, 1994). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 F.3d 328, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 16737, 1995 WL 272563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-m-graf-v-carolyn-badila-board-of-supervisor-ca4-1995.